Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Tiger Gold Master?

Toe said:
They had VW Bugs to release the original iMac, and live panthers to release 10.3. Wonder what they will do with Tiger...
Click to expand...

Seigfried and what's left of Roy?
 
Something to read while you are waiting for Tiger

I recently stumbled across a series of articles that are a great read.

I spent the entire day, last Sunday reading these:

http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.p...apple_and_ibm_rethink_the_powerpc_revolution/

The link is to the most recent article, but at the end it links to all the previous articles. I suggest you start at the first article & follow the links in each article to read the reference material.

The author (alias Neo) does a great job of research and presents a compelling case (or cases) of what is going to happen to Apple, IPTV, CELL CPUs, etc.

Enjoy!

Dick Applebaum

P.S. I suspect that there will be a new article, soon-- Tomorrow?
 
Goodbye Panther (sniff)

Regardless of whether Tiger is announced tomorrow, its debut is imminent. Like most, I am excited for new, wonderful things. But, I am not feeling any pressure to be rid of Panther. I have totally loved this OS, and I have been around many. It was Panther that allowed me to rescue my family from their assimilation by the Redmond Borg. So, as you put that first Tiger install disk in, give Panther a 'pat on the back' for a job well done!
 
terrorbite said:
Surely its a slightly easier process making an OS for Macs rather than PCs, which is why Apple can be more creative, come up with new features and leave Windows trailing behind.
Click to expand...

Yup and this is exactly why Apple likes to own the whole solution. It allows them to work in a much more reasonable and controlled environment. They can spend more time on innovating that way. They also have a much greater ability to insure a good top to bottom experience and robustness for the customer.

This is why many don't believe Apple will be releasing Mac OS X for any other hardware base anytime soon.
 
homerjward said:
i saw someone earlier mention that teh discs are pressed and not burned. what's the difference?
Click to expand...
Internet! ;)

http://www.cd-info.com/refs/terms.html

http://www.absolute-disc.com/pressed-cds.html

http://www.tigerdirect.com/static/html/shredding-light-on-cd-burning.html

http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/APG/2001-08/0998840544

http://www.dbsduplication.com/html/burned_vs_real.html

From the first link:
data layer
In CD-R, the organic dye sandwiched between the polycarbonate substrate and the metalized reflective layer of the media. CD-Recordable discs do not have any data on them until they are recorded. Instead the recording laser selectively melts "pits" into the dye layer -- but rather than burning holes in the dye, it simply melts it slightly, causing it to become non-translucent so the reading laser beam is refracted rather than reflected back to the reader's sensors. In pressed CDs, the data layer is part of the polycarbonate substrate, and is pressed into the top side of it by a "stamper" during the injection moulding process.
 
I think we all kinda knew release was imminent. According to, admittedly third-hand, information from a few employee's I run into now and again, the lead Tiger developers were sent on vacation this week... and an internal party to celebrate is scheduled for the 7th.

I'm excited. I like new stuff.
 
homerjward said:
i saw someone earlier mention that teh discs are pressed and not burned. what's the difference?
Click to expand...
You "burn" short runs via CD-R. Thus the laser creates the surface variation that contains your data. No setup costs, but a high per item cost.

You "press" longer CD-ROM runs via creating an inverted mold and then pressing the surface. Here each disk has the same shape based on the mold. The expense here is creating the mold and retooling the machine to do a new run (more like printing). High set up cost, but low per item cost.
 
xsnightclub said:
MMMmmmm, Fluff!


It is impressive for Apple to beat the deadline that Steve laid out, Apple is going to get lots of good press for coming out on time and with the features they promised, it is really going to embarass Redmond and put more pressure on them to release foghorn earlier with less features and lots of bugs.

Here is to hoping this release is as solid as 10.3
Click to expand...

A MR Exclusive-

Box photo for Longhorn 1.0; Security Holes included
 

Attachments

  • images.jpg
    images.jpg
    3.9 KB · Views: 1,432
misr12 said:
How much of the operating system will OSX (tiger) 10.4 be 64 bit on G5's? Will we see any noticeable boost in overall OS and application use? I never really understood the benefits to the end user. Can someone explain? Are we looking for lag/delay from programers to catchup with the hardware?

Thanks in advance.

Tom
Click to expand...

Very little of Tiger will be 64 bit. The kernel still resides in 32 bit address space but allows access to 64 bit memory thru a library call (LIB64). Most of the 64 bit functionality is for command line based POSIX compliant apps and server daemons.

It is a misconception to believe that just because an App is compiled as 64 bit that it will run faster. In many cases it will actually perform slower. So don't get hung up on the 32 bit versus 64 bit OS debate. 64 bit support will only be important to someone who has an application that can't fit in 2GB of memory as a single thread. There are very few people who have these needs today.
 
Pressing issues, burning needs

homerjward said:
i saw someone earlier mention that teh discs are pressed and not burned. what's the difference?
Click to expand...

I never thought about the two terms before, but now that I think about it, the difference makes sense.

To oversimplify, the pattern read by a laser on a mass-produced CDs is encoded as "pits" in a silvered layer. The physical pattern of pits is pressed in the manufacturing.

That's not how CD-Rs and CD-RWs work, though. The pattern looks the same to the laser that does the reading, but the way it's made is by a laser burning a colored dye layer. (Not as durable, but you don't need special manufacturing equipment to make them.)

So technically, a home-recorded CD-R is "burned" while a mass-produced CD is "pressed."

It's interesting to look into the details of how CDs work--it's amazing all the things that are going on to make them work so well! The laser is cone-shaped, not straight, for instance--which provides resistance to dust and scratches. And the data isn't recorded in order, but in a shuffled pattern--which provides even more resistance to lost data. And some people think that the pits equal binary 1s, while the "land" in between equals 0s. Not so: both pits AND land are 0s--it's the edge BETWEEN a pit and land that creates a 1. Physically, that means more 0s than 1s, so the data is encoded in a way that results in more 0s. It's not a direct replication of the binary data in the file.

EDIT: So... just how many people simultaneously answered the same question, after a half hour of it sitting there unanswered? :D
 
homerjward said:
i saw someone earlier mention that teh discs are pressed and not burned. what's the difference?
Click to expand...
A CD is made up of three layers; a DVD, anywhere from three to five, depending on how much data is on it. The outside layers are plastic, to protect the data surfaces from damage; if you scratch the underside of a CD or DVD, you're scratching the clear plastic layers, and hence polishing can restore the disc to full functioning. The last layer on a CD (and a single layer DVD) holds the actual data.

If you have a double layer DVD, the three remaining layers (I think, anyway) are the two data layers, and a very thin plastic layer separating the two.

Now, the difference between a pressed and a burnt CD lies in the makeup of the data layer(s). When you have a blank, burnable CD or DVD, that layer is a chemical dye of some sort. To write, you focus a relatively high powered laser onto the dye to etch pits, representing the data, onto the layer. To read, you focus a relatively low powered laser onto the dye to determine where the pits are; these are then translated into the actual data you read off the disc. Depending on the chemical composition of the dye, the media will last a certain period of time before deteriorating beyond the point that it can be read clearly.

In comparison, with a pressed CD or DVD, you take the data you want to have on the disc, and produce a master. This master is kind of like a film negative; it holds all the pits in inverse shape. A thin sheet of (generally) aluminium is compressed between the master plates, impressing the pits upon it; the aluminium is then sandwiched between the clear plastic discs to form the final CD. (Yes, I'm glossing over various details. Deal with it.)

The end result is a disc that -- provided it has been carefully glued together and treated with care -- can, in theory, last indefinitely.

If you only have a small number (say, up to a couple of hundred) of CDs or DVDs to ship, burning is significantly cheaper; beyond that point, pressing is cheaper. With pressing, you have the cost of setting up the master plates, which is not small. That cost can be spread across several thousand copies, however, and the raw materials needed for the actual pressing are dirt cheap -- cents per disc or less. In comparison, with burning, you have the dye costs to deal with, which are greater than the raw materials for pressing the discs would cost (obviously, since the chemical makeup of the dye is much more complex than a straight aluminium sheet would be.)

Exact costs? Well, http://www.bbc.co.uk/1xtra/1xmusic/distribution/cdsp04.shtml suggests it's around £200 to set up the masters for mass pressing. So up to around 200 CDs, give or take, you'll want to burn rather than press. Beyond around 1,000 CDs, it's definitely cheaper to press, and the end result is a longer lasting product.

All this is off the top of my head, so please, take it with a grain of salt. Actually, a shaker full of salt would probably be better...
 
sjl said:
A CD is made up of three layers; a DVD, anywhere from three to five, depending on how much data is on it. The outside layers are plastic, to protect the data surfaces from damage; if you scratch the underside of a CD or DVD, you're scratching the clear plastic layers, and hence polishing can restore the disc to full functioning. The last layer on a CD (and a single layer DVD) holds the actual data.

If you have a double layer DVD, the three remaining layers (I think, anyway) are the two data layers, and a very thin plastic layer separating the two.

Now, the difference between a pressed and a burnt CD lies in the makeup of the data layer(s). When you have a blank, burnable CD or DVD, that layer is a chemical dye of some sort. To write, you focus a relatively high powered laser onto the dye to etch pits, representing the data, onto the layer. To read, you focus a relatively low powered laser onto the dye to determine where the pits are; these are then translated into the actual data you read off the disc. Depending on the chemical composition of the dye, the media will last a certain period of time before deteriorating beyond the point that it can be read clearly.

In comparison, with a pressed CD or DVD, you take the data you want to have on the disc, and produce a master. This master is kind of like a film negative; it holds all the pits in inverse shape. A thin sheet of (generally) aluminium is compressed between the master plates, impressing the pits upon it; the aluminium is then sandwiched between the clear plastic discs to form the final CD. (Yes, I'm glossing over various details. Deal with it.)

The end result is a disc that -- provided it has been carefully glued together and treated with care -- can, in theory, last indefinitely.

If you only have a small number (say, up to a couple of hundred) of CDs or DVDs to ship, burning is significantly cheaper; beyond that point, pressing is cheaper. With pressing, you have the cost of setting up the master plates, which is not small. That cost can be spread across several thousand copies, however, and the raw materials needed for the actual pressing are dirt cheap -- cents per disc or less. In comparison, with burning, you have the dye costs to deal with, which are greater than the raw materials for pressing the discs would cost (obviously, since the chemical makeup of the dye is much more complex than a straight aluminium sheet would be.)

Exact costs? Well, http://www.bbc.co.uk/1xtra/1xmusic/distribution/cdsp04.shtml suggests it's around £200 to set up the masters for mass pressing. So up to around 200 CDs, give or take, you'll want to burn rather than press. Beyond around 1,000 CDs, it's definitely cheaper to press, and the end result is a longer lasting product.

All this is off the top of my head, so please, take it with a grain of salt. Actually, a shaker full of salt would probably be better...
Click to expand...


Actually CD's have the data encoded on a film on the top of the CD underneath the paint.
If you scratch thru the paint of the top the cd it will become useless.
 
I preordered mine through Amazon. I wonder how quickly Amazon will get their copies to send one to me?
 
This thread has produced an interesting array og Google ads:



Refurbished Macs
1000s of Refurb Suppliers with the Top Brand Name Refurbished Products

Buy Texas Longhorns Gear
Jerseys, shirts, hats, & more. Huge Selection, Low Prices!

Longhorn products galore
Find a vast selection of Texas Longhorn merchandise at
 
~loserman~ said:
Very little of Tiger will be 64 bit.
Click to expand...
Be careful on what you mean by "64 bit". Tiger will utilize a lot of the G5's 64 bit general math capabilities more so then under Panther. It will support processes that want to use 64 bit addressing in addition to the existing 32 bit addressing support.

~loserman~ said:
The kernel still resides in 32 bit address space but allows access to 64 bit memory thru a library call (LIB64).
Click to expand...
Yes the kernel will continue to exist in an 32b address space but user mode processes can use either 32b or 64b addressing (both can use 64b math operations). Those using 64b addressing are limited to (currently) only those that link against the 64b version of libSystem (core POSIX/UNIX APIs).

~loserman~ said:
It is a misconception to believe that just because an App is compiled as 64 bit that it will run faster. In many cases it will actually perform slower.
Click to expand...
Agreed if you are limiting "64 bit" to mean 64 bit addressing.

For the curious... when an application is using 64 bit addressing then all pointers it uses to address memory are twice the size of those used by a 32 bit application. This extra size mean more data is moved in and out of the CPU when dealing with addresses, fewer pointers can fit in caches, etc. and this is why a 64 bit addressing application can run slower then an equivalent 32 bit addressing application.

Of course having access to the huge address space that 64 bit addressing provides can allow applications to run that couldn't be run before or ran non-optimally because of having to function in a much much smaller address space. For those types of applications the ability to use 64 bit addressing far out weighs the negatives.
 
homerjward said:
i saw someone earlier mention that teh discs are pressed and not burned. what's the difference?
Click to expand...
Note from the moderator: homerjward's question has now been answered. Thank you for your answers. Since this has gotten us a bit off topic, please do not make any further posts in this thread about pressing vs. burning. You are welcome to discuss that topic in another thread if you have more to share about it.

Thank you.
 
shawnce said:
Be careful on what you mean by "64 bit". Tiger will utilize a lot of the G5's 64 bit general math capabilities more so then under Panther. It will support processes that want to use 64 bit addressing in addition to the existing 32 bit addressing support.


Yes the kernel will continue to exist in an 32b address space but user mode processes can use either 32b or 64b addressing (both can use 64b math operations). Those using 64b addressing are limited to (currently) only those that link against the 64b version of libSystem (core POSIX/UNIX APIs).


Agreed if you are limiting "64 bit" to mean 64 bit addressing.

For the curious... when an application is using 64 bit addressing then all pointers it uses to address memory are twice the size of those used by a 32 bit application. This extra size mean more data is moved in and out of the CPU when dealing with addresses, fewer pointers can fit in caches, etc. and this is why a 64 bit addressing application can run slower then an equivalent 32 bit addressing application.

Of course having access to the huge address space that 64 bit addressing provides can allow applications to run that couldn't be run before or ran non-optimally because of having to function in a much much smaller address space. For those types of applications the ability to use 64 bit addressing far out weighs the negatives.
Click to expand...

No disagreements.
This has been covered so many times on this site in other threads so I didnt want to go into specifics. and have this thread totally degenerate into that discussion.
 
Super excited about Tiger

Got the fund together and am ready to purchase.

I hope the specs arent too high because if i cant run Tiger fully on my less than a year old pb...well...i would be sad

note-sorry about the previous post, didnt read the moderators statement before posting.
 
I've just been browsing in my copy of:

Ye olde Cumputer Almanacke
‘An Almanacke and Prognosticatyon for the Yeare of our Lorde MMV.
practysed by Stephan Jobbes, Doctor in Physike.'

And entry for April starts:

Ye daye of the foole it stand before us,
Adams fruit be no hokus pokus,
A Tygger appeerrs no commen curse
Come and emptyeth thy purse.

So the rumours must be true!!!!!
 
Hey maybe amazon.com knew that Tiger would Gold Master (GM) on March 31st. Remember a couple months back when it said that Tiger's release date was March 31st? No joke!

Maybe Apple forced Amazon to sell Tiger at a discounted price because they were mad that Amazon released their confidential release date information (i.e. $35 off). It now says on Amazon that the prerelease discount will be until May 31st which implies that May 31st will be the date that Tiger will be released. Could Apple be part of this? :confused:
 
DickArmAndHarT said:
I hope the specs arent too high because if i cant run Tiger fully on my less than a year old pb...well...i would be sad
Click to expand...
Don't be sad :) I don't think official reqs are out yet, but I know I've seen reqs for test versions that said you need a G3! So your G4 is fine. (It better be, it's the same machine I have!)

As for Tiger on Windows... let's hope people keep on clinging to that dream :D And then when they can take it no more... get a Mac because that's the only place their dream will be reality.
 
Are we still wishing for a PC version of Tiger?
Click to expand...


Noo!! Don't let the PC bast***s install our precious tiger on their scummy machines!

Not much of a worry anyway.... that would be quite a stretch for Apple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back